the moon landing hoax and Columbia cover up

[MID]

Thanks MID, well put.

You're welcome Mr. B.

Orbital mechanics are very strange...speed up to slow down, and vice versa...

Somewhat counterintutive, isn't it?

You speed up and you go down...You slow down and you go up...wanna catch something in orbit...don't thrust right at it!

It's fun stuff. I still get a kick out of rendezvous on Shuttle flights.

That Columbia was above or below the LM at that point wasn't really an issue, as they (or one of them) could maneuver to keep the two together for as long as needed. Only after small inputs separated the two did the LM make the initial descent burn to lower the low point of it's orbit in preparation for landing.

Absolutely correct. Their separation wasn't significant enough to make any real diference in their orbits, and they could indeed make small tweaks to remain in what was virtually a stationkeeping position.

This photo was taken a full orbit, maybe a tad more, prior to landing.

Yep...I think you're just about dead on.

I think on that front side pass they separated, and the LM executed DOI on the back side, and PDI when they came around again...

[MID]

Didn't I answer the question regarding the LM being above the CSM in a previous post? I know someone raised it and I explained why (though not as eloquently as MID) but can't remember if it was on this board or another forum.

You probably did OM.

I think that question has been answered several times.

I'd bet it was on the Moon Hoax thread!

[rajeev shagun]

Hello 5th time-

I have been watching the footage of STS-107’s lift-off from Israeli TV crew’s camera which was positioned right side of shuttle, I have been comparing it with the footage I saw here in India (most probably from Indian national TV DOORDARSHAN crew’s camera) the footage from the camera which was positioned back of the shuttle as you can see in illustration sketch… I am sure when they showed in India ,the piece of insulation foam coming off from shuttle’s liquid fuel tank…the shuttle not even started to roll from left to right and tilting on 39`angle.

So roughly this piece of foam came off even before then I guessed though you and NASA say it wasn’t harmful for tiles in this stage.

Mr Mid said this angle footage ( the angle which shows in illustration here in attached image) is available every where.

Can you kindly tell me where can I find this angle’s footage on internet or else where ?

The illustration shows here the red longer block this is suppose to be the piece of foam which came off from Columbia’s liquid fuel tank. If this footage is not from STS-107 flight then now you have idea how it should looks like, so will you bother to find which other flight it could be from?

Why I am keep talking about it again and again because when you know somebody is going to be killed but that person doesn’t know and you can’t do any thing in half of the month time,the feelings are very…very bad. This is the pain exactly I have been going through.

I knew there were 7 precious life’s on the board and had their son, daughter and wife and husbands were waiting home for them and I knew totally that if they come back without home work Columbia will explode…I don’t know why I was so sure of disaster like I was never ever sure of any thing till today.

[rajeev shagun]

Hi Mid -

You are right about

Orbital maneuvers you have to speed down if you have to catch another space craft and if you want to increase the distance between you and other spacecraft then you have to speed up.

Thanks for explaining me about CM and loner surface exactly behind cm image though I am not totally satisfied yet

[MID]

Hello 5th time-

I have been watching the footage of STS-107’s lift-off from Israeli TV crew’s camera which was positioned right side of shuttle, I have been comparing it with the footage I saw here in India (most probably from Indian national TV DOORDARSHAN crew’s camera) the footage from the camera which was positioned back of the shuttle as you can see in illustration sketch… I am sure when they showed in India ,the piece of insulation foam coming off from shuttle’s liquid fuel tank…the shuttle not even started to roll from left to right and tilting on 39`angle.

So roughly this piece of foam came off even before then I guessed though you and NASA say it wasn’t harmful for tiles in this stage.

rajeev--

I know of no TV cameras, and certainly no crews that are permitted to be anywhere within 3 miles of the launch complex at KSC.

The media uses feeds provided by NASA HD cameras, and HDNet cameras and HD audio. They shoot the launch from numerous angles, and those feeds are supplied to media worldwide for broadcast. Credentialed media are restricted to the media center areas.

Mr Mid said this angle footage ( the angle which shows in illustration here in attached image) is available every where.

Can you kindly tell me where can I find this angle’s footage on internet or else where ?

You can go to NASA on the Web, or youtube. There are many STS-107 launch videos, all of them compilations of various camera angles.

The view you speak of is generally not shown as a continuous shot, because the steam and smoke from the engines blocks that view, and the angle changes to show the vehicle.

I have no idea what you were seeing. You'll simply have to link us to that video if and when you can find it. There was nothing apparent going on as you indicate on STS-107 or any other Shuttle flight.

You're describing a massive piece of foam, based on your drawing, shortly after tower clear and measuring somehwere in the vicinity of 45 feet x perhaps 15 feet. That, if it ever occurred, would've been obvious instantly, and would've been a signal that ET foam application processing and testing had failed miserably. No such huge chunk has over come off of an ET...and no significant piece has ever released during the first few seconds of a liftoff.

Here's a photo of STS-107, just about the time you say you saw this:

There's no sign of it, nor any sign of something coming loose...

And if it did, that would've produced a huge rent in the orange foam, visible to all cameras, and a very hazardous condition in a matter of seconds as aerodynamic loads would've literally peeled the foam off of the orbiter as the speed increased. We'd have had a visible, and serious problem within the next 20 seconds, and the Bi-pod ramp issue wouldn't have been a consideration, as I suspect an abort would've been called..

The illustration shows here the red longer block this is suppose to be the piece of foam which came off from Columbia’s liquid fuel tank. If this footage is not from STS-107 flight then now you have idea how it should looks like, so will you bother to find which other flight it could be from?

As I said, I recall no such launch shedding of huge peieces of foam, and no ET inspection after separation that revealed any such loss. And as I say, such a huge loss would've led to much more loss in short order, and very likely an aborted mission.

Additionally, there was no huge pieces of charred foam debris at the pad after the launch. This sort of thing would've been revelaed in post launch pad inspection and cleanup.

Why I am keep talking about it again and again because when you know somebody is going to be killed but that person doesn’t know and you can’t do any thing in half of the month time,the feelings are very…very bad. This is the pain exactly I have been going through.

I knew there were 7 precious life’s on the board and had their son, daughter and wife and husbands were waiting home for them and I knew totally that if they come back without home work Columbia will explode…I don’t know why I was so sure of disaster like I was never ever sure of any thing till today.

I think you're beating youself up over something that you are misintepreting.

The impact occurred as a result of the left bipod ramp, a small piece of foam, releasing from the ET at 1:21 into the flight, and impacting the orbiter's left wing at over 500 MPH. No one was aware of the damage it had done, no one could see it from the orbiter windows, and NASA management mis-managed the analysis of the debris strike and the kinetic effect.

No one actually knew there was significant damage to the RCC on the left wing.

And, while there is no doubt that some people at NASA were concerned about possibilities, no one actually knew what was about to occur on re-entry, and even during the re-entry, Mission Control had no idea what was going on aloft...until I think about 9:00 eastern time, when they were receiving no data at all, when there was no radar tracking coming from the Cape, and when Flight Director Leroy Cain was informed that there was news footage already on the air of the vehicle breaking up over Texas.

I think you're the only person I've ever heard who saw what you say you saw. I don't know that any resolution to this can be made unless we see what you saw.

[MID]

Hi Mid -

Thanks for explaining me about CM and lunar surface exactly behind cm image though I am not totally satisfied yet

You're welcome, and I completely understand your feelings.

Apollo was not, by any means, a simplistic endeavor. There are complexities in such a mission that would blow your mind.

I made that as simple as I could.

Alot of people have assumptions about space flight that are erroneous, and that leads them into alot of confusion and mis-interpretations about what they may be seeing or hearing.

Perhaps the explanation will give you the impetus to research and learn more about the mechanics of spaceflight and the particulars of Apollo lunar orbital operations.

[mrbusdriver]

Additionally, there was no huge pieces of charred foam debris at the pad after the launch. This sort of thing would've been revelaed in post launch pad inspection and cleanup.

I think you're beating youself up over something that you are misintepreting.

The impact occurred as a result of the left bipod ramp, a small piece of foam, releasing from the ET at 1:21 into the flight, and impacting the orbiter's left wing at over 500 MPH. No one was aware of the damage it had done, no one could see it from the orbiter windows, and NASA management mis-managed the analysis of the debris strike and the kinetic effect.

No one actually knew there was significant damage to the RCC on the left wing.

And, while there is no doubt that some people at NASA were concerned about possibilities, no one actually knew what was about to occur on re-entry, and even during the re-entry, Mission Control had no idea what was going on aloft...until I think about 9:00 eastern time, when they were receiving no data at all, when there was no radar tracking coming from the Cape, and when Flight Director Leroy Cain was informed that there was news footage already on the air of the vehicle breaking up over Texas.

I think you're the only person I've ever heard who saw what you say you saw. I don't know that any resolution to this can be made unless we see what you saw.

Indeed. The post flight analysis revealed the emails between the TPS experts, the speculation, the worst case conjecture...it's horribly painful to read. Then, as the telemetry started showing signs of just those events happening during reentry...and seeing the Flight Director, tears streaming down his face, saying "Lock the doors"....

rajeev, I have no idea what you saw. I know the dropping H2 vent line is on that side on the other side of the SRB, it drops at liftoff. Had there been such a shedding anywhere on the vehicle, it would have certainly been seen on the engineering footage from the very many cameras on and around the pad/FSS. It wasn't.

[MID]

Indeed. The post flight analysis revealed the emails between the TPS experts, the speculation, the worst case conjecture...it's horribly painful to read. Then, as the telemetry started showing signs of just those events happening during reentry...and seeing the Flight Director, tears streaming down his face, saying "Lock the doors"....

In remembering that day...it was apparent that Mission Control didn't realize what was happening for some time.

The tension was there as the minutes grew on. After the LOS , which concurred with an expected short duration LOS due to satellite switching, which continued on and on, and Leroy Cain asking when they were supposed to expect radar (from the Cape), and that call:

"A minute ago."

That's when it became apparent. I think everyone in the room knew it at that moment.

But yes...that moment when he called the contingency was, well...

It's one of the reasons I have a tendency to get testy about conspiracy nonsense being tossed about regarding this thing...or Challenger.

[rajeev shagun]

Hi again 6th time-

Mr Mid and Mrbusdriver what ever you explained me about the footage where you see the Apollo command module and in the back ground the moon surface, it is exactly contrary to facts I founded now.(thanks any way for that much of efforts) there was no way to see moon behind the CM because CM was top of the Eagle (check the trajectory plans image) in this case we should had been seeing black space behind the CM or in other case if they were in same altitude in same orbit from lunar surface then it should appear like the image I attached about Soyuz in earth orbit which was taken from Apollo.

Command module always had nose down to the moon surface until Eagle returned from lunar surface and docked again but once you docked you can not take this picture. This is the another evidence of that the Moon landing was a great hoax.

When you watch this footage it looks so unreal that any body with little mind can catch the staging of this footage.

[rajeev shagun]

hi

Yahh mid No matter did the big piece of foam harm the Columbia’s left wing tiles or it happened by the small piece of foam which came off after 82 sec. after lift-off, the result during reentry was the same what I was totally afraid of for.

The scene of window view of reentry 2000~2400 f Heat, plasma, orange and bright flames on wings and shuttle’s airframe it is always scary to me…I think it is a very critical moment for shuttle or any space craft may be we have to be 100% sure of total external safety of shuttle. This is the scene exactly played back front of my eyes when I saw that big piece of foam.

[flyingswan]

...there was no way to see moon behind the CM because CM was top of the Eagle (check the trajectory plans image) in this case we should had been seeing black space behind the CM or in other case if they were in same altitude in same orbit from lunar surface then it should appear like the image I attached about Soyuz in earth orbit which was taken from Apollo.

I think you are checking the wrong plans, that is just a simplified representation. Try looking at the actual flight plan which includes a lot more detail.

[Waspie_Dwarf]

Can I just remind every one of what Lilly said way back in post number 2:

Ok, there's already a thread covering the notion of a hoaxed moon landing: "Did We Land On The Moon?". Please keep the 'moon hoax' discussion there. I suggest that Mr. rajeev shagun needs to do a bit of reading so as not to repeat content that has already been addressed.

Any discussion regarding Columbia can be here.

rajeev shagun, by all means continue to discuss the STS-107 accident in this thread, but please take you arguments about Apollo to the "Did We Land On The Moon?" thread, which can be found HERE.

Thank you.

[MID]

Hi again 6th time-

Mr Mid and Mrbusdriver what ever you explained me about the footage where you see the Apollo command module and in the back ground the moon surface, it is exactly contrary to facts I founded now.(thanks any way for that much of efforts) there was no way to see moon behind the CM because CM was top of the Eagle (check the trajectory plans image) in this case we should had been seeing black space behind the CM or in other case if they were in same altitude in same orbit from lunar surface then it should appear like the image I attached about Soyuz in earth orbit which was taken from Apollo.

rajeev---

The facts you found aren't facts, they are simplistic representations of the mission profile, deliberately drawn out of scale and without details so as to make it simple. I told you Apollo was complex, and the details are difficult for the layman.

You told me you understood about the orbital mechanics things I explained a little while back.

Apparently you do not, and you did not read what I wrote.

Now, I don't want to direct you to the flight plan for the mission. You wouldn't understand it. However, I will direct you to the Apollo 11 Press Kit, which is a 250+ page document provided to the press for their reference. It's got alot of detail in it.

Go here:

APOLLO LUNAR SURFACE JOURNAL

Click on Apollo 11 in the left hand column.

Click on Press Kit in the Background Information group.

Call up the first link and look at page 40 on the PDF.

There you will find the CSM/LM SEPARATION MANEUVER described in diagrams.

On the lower left hand side, you'll see a simplified relative motion diagram describing the relative motion and positions of the LM and CSM during this maneuver.

It says quite clearly "LM ABOVE AND BEHIND".

What I told you about that picture was absolute fact. The LM was above the CSM, exactly as planned at that point in flight. And it would be more above and behind the CSM after the CSM executed its separation maneuver, a short, ~2.5 FPS RCS maneuver radially down from the LM. This maneuver would drop the LM over the next orbit ~ 0.5 miles below the LM.

Why?

I thought you understood that. Lower means faster. The CSM would advance ahead of the LM due to its lower altitude over the next orbit, so that at the point where DOI took place, the LM would be ~ 1.8 miles behind the LM. Then, the LM executed its DOI burn, which I already told you about, dropping its perilune to ~ 9 miles, from which point it would begin its descent to the surface.

What I told you was precisely correct, and the CM was below the LM until DOI.

Consult the Press Kit for your proof of this.

You are looking at someting in your diagram that is completely irrelevant to what you're seeing in the picture.

Command module always had nose down to the moon surface until Eagle returned from lunar surface and docked again but once you docked you can not take this picture. This is the another evidence of that the Moon landing was a great hoax.

Again you are incorrect.

The CSM assumed several attitudes during the solo orbital flight period, depending on what on board equipment she was using. The CSM was "nose down" during the descent, and for a great deal of the time, but...not duiring the undocking and separation phase of lunar orbit flight (where the picture you showed was taken). She was exactly as you saw her in that picture.

I advise you to read very carefully what's written herein before you proclaim evidence of a hoax. It is very silly to interpret irrelevant pictures as evidence of something you obviously have very little technical knowledge of.

You really need to have some understanding of this material before you go proclaiming hoax...

When you have that, you won't do that.

Further:

Please listen to Waspie and post this material over on the Moon Hoax thread.

This one was about STS-107 and I think we're done with that...

Edited June 21, 2010 by MID

[mrbusdriver]

For rajeev,

http://caib.nasa.gov/

Here is the Columbia accident report. I ask that you read it carefully. You have NOT seen this report in some newspaper. Your inattention to detail and claims of caring about the astronauts when NASA "didn't" is getting very tiresome, and frankly, borders on disgusting.

If you cared, you would have read this report (it's been available on the web for years, and not in a newspaper), and understood the Shuttle well enough that your ignorant "rescue" plans had no basis in reality.

You need to start getting informed on the subject before you get into debates...(edit to add ...and we would like to help in the learning. Sorry for the angry tone.)

Edited June 24, 2010 by mrbusdriver

[rajeev shagun]

Hi Mrbusdriver- first thanks for saying that you are not against me. About rescuing the columbia, i replied to MID on other thread...DID WE... I will put that here soon. Since long time even before the columbia first flew by the year 1981 there were always planing how to repair the lost tile's gap and they trained the astronauts for that job i will soon send you the image and talk more about this issue.

[Obviousman]

Did you read the rescue options from the CAIB? Simple question.

[mrbusdriver]

Hi Mrbusdriver- first thanks for saying that you are not against me. About rescuing the columbia, i replied to MID on other thread...DID WE... I will put that here soon. Since long time even before the columbia first flew by the year 1981 there were always planing how to repair the lost tile's gap and they trained the astronauts for that job i will soon send you the image and talk more about this issue.

At the time, there were no real operational procedures for fixing/repairing damaged tiles. However, the damage to Columbia was to the leading edge RCC, where the temperatures are even higher and the stresses much greater than on the tile surfaces. There was certainly no repair option for that.

And they had no EVA suits to do any repairs, nor an airlock to leave the shuttle.

Repair by the Columbia crew was not an option.

[mrbusdriver]

At the time, there were no real operational procedures for fixing/repairing damaged tiles. However, the damage to Columbia was to the leading edge RCC, where the temperatures are even higher and the stresses much greater than on the tile surfaces. There was certainly no repair option for that.

And they had no EVA suits to do any repairs, nor an airlock to leave the shuttle.

Repair by the Columbia crew was not an option.

OK, I'm WRONG on this. I didn't do my appropriate resarch. I apologize.

STS107 DID have an airlock, and if I read the Accident Report correctly, DID carry 2 EVA suits. What it didn't have were any specific materials or tools for tile or RCC repair. There is a long discussion of the possible contingency operations, and they were dangerous. They would be out of sight from the crew cabin, no hand holds out by the wing, sharp edges around the payload bay doors and radiators, and a strong possibility of damaging other things during the spacewalk.

There was also the possibility of launching Atlantis, carrying additional EVA suits, for crew rescue.

But this is hindsight. They didn't even know there was serious damage to the heat shield at the time.

Anyway, apologies again for spreading "bad dope"...

[Obviousman]

That's correct - two EVA suits, and most everything else you say is correct. Post-flight studies came up with a possible repair but it was marginal at best.

It involved just stuffing the hole with spare items, then using a water bag secured over the hole. The damaged wing would be kept in darkness and the water would freeze. They'd then seal the hole with tape.

No-one knows if it would have survived the re-entry heating but IMO it's unlikely and the result would have been the same.

The ATLANTIS option was better but still very high risk.

[rajeev shagun]

Dear MRBUSDRIVER-

Good morning !

Here I attached for you and Mr Mid and other knowledgeable people the plan of NASA ,how to simply repair the void which is left by lost tiles. It is very simple and these plans were exist even before Columbia could first fly In the year 1981.

I think these are very basic shuttle’s rescue procedures and they must always have these facilities on board.

[Czero 101]

Dear MRBUSDRIVER-

Good morning !

Here I attached for you and Mr Mid and other knowledgeable people the plan of NASA ,how to simply repair the void which is left by lost tiles. It is very simple and these plans were exist even before Columbia could first fly In the year 1981.

I think these are very basic shuttle’s rescue procedures and they must always have these facilities on board.

Yes, the plan for repairing or replacing the thermal tiles on the orbiter has been in place for a long time, however the damage done to Columbia was to the reinforced carbon-carbon leading edge panel(s) of the port wing. Those panels (see image below) cannot be repaired or replaced using the methods shown in your image / article.

Hole in RCC leading-edge panel, a result of impact testing in the investigation of the Space Shuttle Columbia disaster.

Soft polyurethane foam impacted this mock-up of a space shuttle wing at approximately 850 km/h.

Image credit: NASA

Cz

[rajeev shagun]

Hi again Mrbusdriver and Obviousman-

Yah… you are both right now…I think they must had EVA suits on Columbia.

About nobody was certain that there is a real damage of tiles on the left wing …Yes there were certainly two people knew about it First person was (I put his name first) safety engineer of launch pad Mr Robert d. who was worried about tiles and emailed may be 14 times to Houston mission control and second sad person I was, who was sure of total 100% explosion( if you trust me) if they come back without homework and try to reenter.

[Obviousman]

No, it was NOT the tiles.

It was the reinforced carbon leading edge.

Have you read the rescue options as described in the CAIB report? Please - yes or no.

[rajeev shagun]

Hi Czero-

You are as well right about carbon panels damages if there were any damage on carbon panels…please can you till me the possibilities of damaging the shuttle on reentry phase due to the damaged carbon panels.

[rajeev shagun]

Sorry i haven't read the report